Hallo!

On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 09:01:49 -0400, <deinx nxtxr> wrote:

> On 4/25/10 7:23 AM, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
> > Hallo!
> > [...]
> > Yes.  It also has in part to do with respect towards the artistic
> > creation the language embodies.  The same way you usually won't add
> > a stroke to a painting done by someone else, you won't add a word
> > to someone else's conlang.  And Star Trek fans usually treat the
> > Star Trek canon as if it was real, drawing a clear line between
> > canon and non-canon.  (However, as Mark J. Reed pointed out a few
> > years ago here, the Klingonists don't care much about Star Trek
> > canon; rather they care about Klingon canon, which follows the
> > rule that the only person in existence who could create canon
> > material is Okrand himself.)
> 
> This is true but I see no problem with adding vocabulary and coining 
> words if it's done in a manner that conforms to the spirit of the 
> original creation.

Right.  The best way of doing this is to use the languages's own
word-formation system (derivation and compounding) to build new words
from whichever morphemes the language has.  For example, one could build
Old Albic words for 'telephone' and 'computer' as _pharnacvethil_
'far-speak-instrument' and _teldil_ 'reckon-instrument', respectively.
With any well-developed conlang with a well-rounded vocabulary, this
should almost always be possible.

This is more respectful to the original creation than just inventing
words from scratch; the latter would be like adding a stroke to
someone else's painting, and disrespectful.

>       In a case, like TP though that's just not easily  
> done because the basic premise of TP is its simplicity with the small 
> set of primes being at the core.

Yes.  Toki Pona is a special case because its vocabulary is closed.
Any addition of words to it would no longer be truly Toki Pona.

--
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html